1. Trang chủ
  2. » Ngoại Ngữ

2017-law-review-risinger-experts-inference-innocence-symposium-agenda

4 1 0

Đang tải... (xem toàn văn)

THÔNG TIN TÀI LIỆU

Thông tin cơ bản

Tiêu đề Experts, Inference and Innocence
Tác giả Simon A. Cole, Jennifer L. Mnookin, David S. Caudill, Andrew Sulner, Michael J. Saks, Dan Simon, David L. Faigman, Jules Epstein, William C. Thompson, Richard D. Friedman, Barbara A. Spellman, Ronald J. Allen, Dale A. Nance
Người hướng dẫn Kathleen M. Boozang, Dean and Professor of Law
Trường học Seton Hall University
Chuyên ngành Law and Forensic Science
Thể loại Symposium
Năm xuất bản 2017
Thành phố South Orange
Định dạng
Số trang 4
Dung lượng 287,54 KB

Các công cụ chuyển đổi và chỉnh sửa cho tài liệu này

Nội dung

Boozang, Dean and Professor of Law, Seton Hall University School of Law 8:50 - 10:15 am: Panel One: The structure of forensic science reform: From SDOs to TWGs to SWIGS to Cacophony—pr

Trang 1

EXPERTS, INFERENCE AND INNOCENCE

A Symposium in Honor of the Work of D Michael Risinger

October 27 to 28, 2017

Program Friday, October 27

8:00 am: Registration & Continental Breakfast

Kathleen M Boozang, Dean and Professor of Law, Seton Hall University School

of Law

8:50 - 10:15 am: Panel One: The structure of forensic science reform: From SDOs to

TWGs to SWIGS to Cacophony—progress or the illusion of progress?

The 2009 National Academies of Science report STRENGTHENING FORENSIC

SCIENCE IN THE UNITED STATES—APATH FORWARD identified many weaknesses in American forensic science, from problems of validity and lack

of uniform standards, to structural problems in the way forensic science results are generated, to problems in the way those results are communicated

to juries This panel will examine the current state of forensic science and the idea of progress as it applies to forensic science, both before the NAS report and since

Simon A Cole, Professor of Criminology, Law and Society and Director of the Newkirk Center for Science & Society, University of California, Irvine

Jennifer L Mnookin, Dean and David G Price and Dallas P Price Professor of

Law, and Co-Director, Program on Understanding Law, Science & Evidence, UCLA

School of Law

David S Caudill, Arthur M Goldberg Professor of Law, Villanova University

Widger School of Law

Andrew Sulner, Document Examiner, Andrew Sulner M.S., J.D., Forensic

Document Examinations, LLC, New York, New York

Trang 2

10:15 – 10:30 am: Break

10:30 – 12:15 pm: Panel Two: What expert results are valid enough to be fit for purpose?

This panel will address what it means to have the results of forensic expertise

be sufficiently validated to be fit for the consideration of juries in different contexts Problems of validation both under ideal conditions and under the conditions prevailing in practice will be addressed

D Michael Risinger, John J Gibbons Professor of Law, Seton Hall University

School of Law Michael J Saks, Regents' Professor - College of Law and Department of Psychology, and

Faculty Fellow, Center for Law, Science & Innovation, Arizona State University Dan Simon, Richard L and Maria B Crutcher Professor of Law and Psychology,

USC Gould School of Law David L Faigman, Chancellor & Dean, and John F Digardi Distinguished Professor

of Law, U.C Hastings College of the Law

Jules Epstein, Professor of Law and Director of Advocacy Programs, Temple

University Beasley School of Law 12:15 – 1:15 pm: Lunch

1:15 – 2:30 pm: Panel Three: Getting ordinary humans to understand the meaning of

expert results: What the current research suggests doesn’t work, and what might work

This panel will address the problem of how to express technical results from various forensic science disciplines to ordinary humans such as judges and jurors, so that they understand the validity and diagnosticity of the evidence sufficiently not to either underweigh or overweigh its probative value

William C Thompson, Professor of Criminology, Law, and Society; Psychology and

Social Behavior; and Law, University of California, Irvine

Richard D Friedman, Alene and Allan F Smith Professor of Law, University of

Michigan Law School

Barbara A Spellman, Professor of Law, University of Virginia School of Law

2:30 – 2:45 pm: Break

Trang 3

2:45 – 5:00 pm: Panel Four: The Weight of Burdens: Decision thresholds and how to

get ordinary people to operationalize them the way we want them to

This panel will address the fundamental problem of how to conceptualize the level of certainty represented by standards of proof, and how then to instruct juries to get them to understand what we want from them in that regard

D Michael Risinger, John J Gibbons Professor of Law, Seton Hall University School of Law

Ronald J Allen, John Henry Wigmore Professor of Law, Northwestern University

Pritzker School of Law

Dale A Nance, John Homer Kapp Professor of Law, Case Western Reserve

University School of Law

Michael S Pardo, Upson Sims Professor of Law, University of Alabama School

of Law

Kevin M Clermont, Robert D Ziff Professor of Law, Cornell Law School

Edward K Cheng, Professor of Law and current FedEx Research Professor, Vanderbilt University Law School

Saturday, October 28

9:00 – 10:30 am: Panel Five: If the “science” changes, when should the convicted get

relief?

This panel will address the increasingly common problem of cases in which a criminal defendant was convicted in whole or in part on forensic science testimony that is now discredited, either wholly, or in the form in which it was presented to the jury The ethical problems this presents to prosecutors and to judges faced with such cases, and to the legal system as a whole, will

be considered

Edward J Imwinkelried, Edward L Barrett, Jr Professor of Law Emeritus, U.C

Davis School of Law

Trang 4

Aviva A Orenstein, Associate Dean for Academic Affairs; Professor of Law and Val

Nolan Faculty Fellow, Indiana University Maurer School of Law

JoAnne A Epps, Provost, Temple University, and former Dean, Temple University

Beasley School of Law

Alex Stein, Professor of Law, Brooklyn Law School

10:30 – 10:45 am: Break

10:45 am – 12:30 pm: Panel Six: Costs, benefits and trade-offs involved in freeing the

innocent and convicting the guilty

This panel will consider the fundamental moral problem of how much worse

it really is to convict a factually innocent person than it is to let one or more guilty people escape justice for the same or a similar crime, and what factors should go into that calculus It will also consider whether the calculus ought

to be different in a post-conviction setting, and the ethical problems this presents to prosecutors and to judges faced with such cases, and to the legal system as a whole

Larry Laudan, Lecturer, University of Texas Law School Keith A Findley, Associate Professor of Law, University of Wisconsin Law School, and Co-founder and Senior Advisor, Wisconsin Innocence Project

Marvin Zalman, Professor, College of Liberal Arts and Sciences, Wayne State

University

Erik Lillquist, Associate Provost for Academic Projects, Seton Hall University, and

Professor of Law, Seton Hall University School of Law

Roger Koppl, Professor of Finance, Whitman School of Management, Syracuse

University

Paul G Cassell, Ronald N Boyce Presidential Professor of Criminal Law and

University Distinguished Professor of Law, University of Utah S.J Quinney College

of Law

Ngày đăng: 25/10/2022, 06:02

🧩 Sản phẩm bạn có thể quan tâm

w